Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    January 7, 2015 2:30pm-3:01pm PST

2:30 pm
>> to study level one. >> no. >> actually, we pulled up the notes you haven't read the notes correctly i've seen them verbatim and when it came to a vote on february 9th you weren't present at the meeting according to my notes and february 9th vote was on level one engagement which - >> colleagues. >> can the director speak. >> i have to make known we have folks from the retirement board so if folks have questions dork housing authority. >> there was a vote in october to study it and special meeting called in which the lady was present and seconded the motion if covered the carbon vote under
2:31 pm
the boards social policy one meeting in which not a successful vote of the board to engage and special meeting in february which she was he present and in fact seconded the motion and voted in favor of the motion. >> okay. thank you i have in my votes different from that but. >> i think on the main point the intent is that i've actually made extra efforts to attend and be involved in that it's an area that was per mixing i went with another person the kennedy are big advocates we were other n out in boston with the pension fund i was telling supervisor
2:32 pm
avalos it was disstressing to people hadn't step forwarded in the pension like new york and areas like that and gone to level two or three so i feel we need to find out why that's the case but i would vac advocate that i think it's a good idea and again, you don't move forward rationally you need to have beneficial results you can take little steps and move forward and we couldn't be at the for front of that. >> i'm hearing from staff you were not present at the february 19th meeting to be able to second the level one you may have seconded the vote for studying that's my original question and my staff is bringing the notes i want to
2:33 pm
make sure we're accurate about what happened i'm trying to work on the original notes that came from the minutes from the sf meeting so i feel like what i've been told put before me is accurate. >> there was one special meeting yes, we're 56 that with the commission secretary a special meeting at the health commission. >> i actually didn't attend that meeting i was out of town i wanted to attend that meeting. >> so we'll confirm that with a confirmation. >> i wanted to attend that meeting they asked for our president and do for a date and once he had a quorum he decided to move forward but i tried to get at that meeting. >> thank you, my questions director hugging i hugh you
2:34 pm
would verify the information before you present at the full board i would image i'm a little bit - >> we're confirming whether or not it was seconded by the lady if she was not at the meeting it wasn't to engage at a level one so the information we're having that verified she was not in attendance. >> again, i actually there was an original meeting at our board it was a while ago i remembered standing up and saying i'd like to go to level one but really like to move a step forward and find out the environmental foundations are doing if they're not doing it we need to understand why if we have a $17 billion foundation the
2:35 pm
biggest in the world we need to know why a that's why i advocate to understand why it didn't maple we demanded take a step forward but i'm not against doing the process and moving forward in the process. >> i appreciate that i do want to make sure that the work that the sf has already done towards deinvestment can continue and you're able to take some leadership to a greater stent so folks on the commission have taken as far especially with your expertise that you have and the relationship i have in the that the firms are looking for investments as well. >> that's something you can - >> yes. i think the other thing that i did do at the
2:36 pm
meeting one of the greatest investment experts is jeremy an advocate of trying to understand fossil fuels and their impacts on the world we have that particular fund in the portfolio and which is called grants of may 0th he has done a good job of pointing out areas we have the responsibility to work harder the dirty air fossil fuels didn't mean we have to go across the board but start somewhere i did that in the public session. >> but one of the things the reasons we looked at fossil fuel deinvestmentivestment but take in the
2:37 pm
fossil fuel you know search and development the cost of producing some of the hard to get to fuels would skyrocket or have great volatility in the market we're seeing across the globe in o peck to the producers in the united states there's conflict moving on to when the prices change we've seen the prices of oil has gone down between $50 from $100 and seeing the market look you know a investments go down because of the vital in the market as 3rek9d it something we expect to continue for years to come forever moving forward so it didn't make financial sense that we pool you know our public dollars out of you know
2:38 pm
those industries that are looking at having very fluctuating types of returns so that to me was an important reason why looking forward we're seeing take effect into the financial market. >> you and i talked about this as jeremy grant says those are depleting resources it is costing us more and more money it's okay. when did areas are new and but as time goes on we won't have those resources in the future so i think that spending more time with him he's one of the best investors and understanding how to do that we can take a leadership really in that i'd like to spend more time when i went with commissioner
2:39 pm
bridges out the kennedy compound for the conference they had 60 representatives from around the country they said this is distressing people haven't taken and lead but why the $200,000 pensions not moving quicker it's the same issues of south african they start with small steps and 311 don't it but you've got to have the information behind you if you're going to tell the employees and the retirees about tobacco and it didn't happen overnight people studied and study and went to level one but it's a passionate interest of mine i've been involved in that area and have traveled around
2:40 pm
the world the conservation international the hot spots all over the world it's not something temporary i've given money in that area i'm involved in it i will take a leadership on that with stuffers. >> colleagues want to ask questions. >> supervisor yee. >> thank you supervisor tang thank you for being here today and answering our questions and thank you for reaching out to many of any colleagues and myself yesterday in regards to the issue of devesting from fossil fuel i royals how complicated the issue is at the same time my frustration is not knowing what the next steps are whether we're
2:41 pm
going to be taking this seriously or not and no indicators so, yes we can study it and study it for a little while which is fine but i'm wondering can i be a leader in this and sigh look at some point we need a timeline at least for me personally i'll feel satisfaction not are we actually going to do something so my question for you will you be willing to take a leadership role. >> i would do that and i've actually you mention i need to talk to our president of the commission because he basically runs the board right now but i think taking a leadership roll in that area is something i can easily do and i'll try to do that i regret not being there are
2:42 pm
more the fossil file special meeting but that didn't prevent me from attending conferences that are important in that area we built solidarity to move ahead i wouldn't take 4 days out of my life to go to conferences with some of the top experts in the world if i wasn't interested in it. >> the other issues that supervisor avalos raised in terms of our personal investments and questions of ethic and again, thank you for being frank with me in our discussion and explaining the differences in the different fund and and so forth and you mentioned yesterday if i had known that may have been an issue to the public you probably
2:43 pm
wouldn't have done that you may or may not have but so i ask the question whether or not to me it's not i don't see that a problem an individual problem it is sort of an institutional problem in the sent i encourage i don't want to have protective policy but mosaicly internal to our board to urge that during the your orientation that the staff will give to new members actually bring those things up to choose what they want if that had been brought up to you you may not have wanted to do that again, i'm urging i work with staff to make this an administrative requirement. >> okay. you want me to address that issue of mature funds how they work at stuffers.
2:44 pm
>> yes. it is very complicated so there's two parts of rule and one on form seven hundred we need to disclose any private investment that we made at stuffers in our own portfolios so there was a question because i invested in a manner called grant the mayo this is the advocate of understanding fossil fuels there they're well well known manager so the first part you need to list them on form seven hundred if it's a private investment and the investment was a public investment it was a public mature you fund by law your allowed to invest in so when i was talking to the supervisor i said it wasn't innovate a special investment by
2:45 pm
something like a large companies stock i probably would have been better buying an ethics fund with all the heat i've gone but truly by the rule i didn't violate the rule because i involved in a public mature fund i didn't need to disclose why did i disclose this i disclosed it because later on itself realize i was new occupy the board and explicit realize they had something with another same company invested with the merging market bond so i did large stocks and so when i said to the supervisor is with all the heat i know that would probably say not it's an issue it's wrong but i could have bauth bought on s m 5 fund and
2:46 pm
would have done better in the future we need to be cognizant of that the supervisor would say under any circumstances it's not a violation because it's a a public investment but a $10 minimum you got in under the $10 million minimum it was established as the 1950 c investigated it and i violated anything but i had the ability to enter that fund 10 years prior i came into the stuffers board the second part no commissioner should benefit personally from being on that commission you shouldn't get anything special it was established i had that ability 10 years before i came into the board but lined up i thought
2:47 pm
i'll find another fund to invest in i don't want to establish criteria for a someone on the board i know you have investment in fund and the reason is their mature fund and their public so you know the house thousands and thousands and millions of people can get into them but to prevent us from getting into something private that is a limited amount of people thank you supervisor campos. >> thank you very much thank you for that information and that explanation where i disagree it's not the director has that final say on whether or not you've followed the rules the ethics commission handles that but as all of us a public commissioners there's
2:48 pm
scrutiny the important thing to insure we have an open discussion and i take what you've said at face value and appreciate that so i think it is simply about letting the public know that those issues are being addressed when their raised i have one final question it's not for you but for the city attorney because i understand and appreciate the fatiguing fact you are to the extent there's an issue with the rfp with supervisor campos raised that you would your intent to recuse you, yourself makes sense but a quick question for the city attorney there are times under section he 1090 when a recall alone is not sufficient and there is the possibility that even with the recall there might
2:49 pm
be a violation by the agency there are exceptions i'll ask the city attorney to examine on that but i believe that's not the case but if it were the board would be informed of that. >> through the chair. >> john gibner, deputy city attorney as you mentioned supervisor campos there's a government code section 1090 is essentially says that public officials kaunt can't have a - the law is broad and there's a number of exceptions in some circumstances an official can recuse themselves when there's a conflict under section 1090 the only answer to divest or resign
2:50 pm
from the board i understand from ms. jordan she may have a conflict it sound like it fits into the exceptions of recall and not the one that - of course if the contract situation we'll work closely to make sure she recuse hey. >> i want to make sure that's understood and that issue becomes a problem we'll know and one thing i'll say and what i value and love about san francisco is that you know we're very proud of how we would do the people's work, if you will it's interesting we're talking about a position your volunteering our time and we're
2:51 pm
grateful our willing to do that but it says a lot about who we are when that happens when you have this level of money being involved with the retirement of so many people we take this obligation seriously and so i think this is something we should be proud of we can have those discussions and in the on because i think this is something in the end serves not only the public the retirees but also the individual involved the fact you're willing to come here had he have this on discussion says a lot about you. >> 134i supervisor avalos i'd like to ask if the retirement board has answers to the questions regarding the votes or questions director hughes. >> we've verified at the october 2013 there was a motion
2:52 pm
to divest from supervisor avalos and that motion failed and it is subsequent to that a motion by brian and seconded by psa kin jordan to bring back a full analysis of level one and 2 deinvestment to a special meeting held in february so the motion she indicated she seconded was the the second motion after the second motion to divest but to bring back a complete analysis of level one and two for the boards consideration. >> a motion to study level one and two for the staff to look at it. >> within 90 days that's correct. >> in february we called a special meeting in order to have outside of earlier than our normal board month to month.
2:53 pm
>> thank you thank you, colleagues any further questions or discussion. >> just - that's exactly what i had said her motion was to study the issue and what was being said a motion to i know go to level one which wasn't the case so for in semi metrics it's important to see what we're talking about i'm ready to support ms. psa kin jordan i present our coming here and your patience in coming through here and our time you know thank you for your service. >> okay. >> all right. thank you any further comments if colleagues seeing none is there another motion on the item item 4 and motion to approve. >> all right. a motion to
2:54 pm
approve the mayors reappointment of psa kin jordan and seconded by sxhooefrl and i'd like to share with the public we'll not be holding public comment on this we held it at our last board meeting so madam clerk call the roll. >> supervisor yee supervisor avalos supervisor breed supervisor campos supervisor cowen supervisor farrell supervisor kim supervisor mar supervisor tang supervisor wiener there are 10 i's your thank you 24 motion to approve the mayors repoint in time is adapted unanimously and before we move on to the next item (clapping.) before we move on to the next item i want to recognize we have
2:55 pm
in our chamber former art torres i didn't see him earlier without my glasses so madam clerk if we can actually go to our next item, please. >> the next item is a special order at 2:00 p.m. for the board of directors to sit as a committee as a whole approval of the item 5 a hearing on the status of the labor dispute at san francisco international airport restaurants. >> so colleagues item 5 madam clerk call that. >> to schedule the board of supervisors to an advisory committee often january 7th at 2:00 p.m. to hold a public hearing to consider the issues and i rising from the san francisco international restaurant. >> for this item i'd like to call on supervisor mar. >> thank you supervisor tang because - >> sorry if the people are
2:56 pm
leaving the chamber do so quietly please and because of the testimony of many of the airport workers from our december meeting and the hard work behind john martin and thank you to kathy for the issues of the labor concerns were revolved with agreements that were both supported by the vendors and the workers and local 2 did a lot of work but i'll say that our director john martin and kathy did around the clock work to make sure it was resolved successfully there's no need to follow through with the motion and i'm wondering whether i move to file the motion or do we need to continue the committee as a whole at all. >> so supervisor mar you can table this and it will
2:57 pm
automatically dispense with item 2 first of all public comment on item 5 reconvene i'd like to see if there's any partnership webinar members of the public whether we should challenge as a committee as a whole seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor mar. >> i move we file the item and appreciate the work of the airport and that's been seconded by supervisor farrell and without objection item 5 is tabled and automatically item 2 is dispensed as well madam clerk go to roll call vote for introduction. >> first supervisor to introduce new business is supervisor yee. >> roll call for the introduction of new business. >> submitted. >> supervisor avalos.
2:58 pm
>> thank you madam clerk and colleagues happy new year i appreciate our presence e.r. presence i have a short thing to discuss i'm interested in moving forward on this year as we've been part of san francisco's been part of dealing with an affordability crisis for a number of years i dependent e expect it to ton through this year and building that we need to really support a lot of the fonts outside of city hall were desperately trying to have folks stay in san francisco with policy and i actually would like to see if we can dwaej in another form of a task force to look at that issue perhaps being convened by the controllers or the budget
2:59 pm
analyst but not driven by anyone in particular office but driven by the great need we have to make sure that our economy can grow and lift all votes and not just a few that are being lifted in the city i want to propose that is something we can engage in i've talked with todd in the controller's office he's come from the puc that worked previously with the controller's office worked on a task force that was around revenue back in 2004 under then supervisor and that task force identified a number of revenue ideas that in the past 10 years many have been implemented one from the payrolling tax to the gross receipts tax and looking at want utility users fee in 2008 and
3:00 pm
the discussion around the transfer tax for properties over several many millions of dollars enacted in 2010 supports by the board of supervisors we need a task force to address this critical issue addressing our city and call but out to the mayor staff and others in our office as well to take part in this effort one that maybe in a decade from now we can look back at creating ideas helping people to sty in the city so call out controller at the mayor's office to join me in the forest and look forward to your part in that as well. >> thank you supervisor avalos supervisor campos. >> happy new year. >> supervisor farrell


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on